supervisor cowen. >> thank you very much supervisor avalos please add me as a co-sponsor there are a few thank you's in order on this particular topic supervisor avalos thank you and want to recognize the leadership in our to yourself office mr. jose cisneros offend a letter into calling apple wells fargo to be accountable for their actions also want to recognition our state truant officer john chang that is joined the list a growing list of elected leaders calling for and denoing the unsafe business practices of wells fargo. >> and far away from where we are but close in our hearts is senator elizabeth warren in the hearing the senate several

months ago calling in question many questions and drizzling the ceo john stumble on accountability or in particular case lack of affordability when i think about the banking and commerce of the united states it is pretty very powerful group of men that really, truly rule the banking and finance world and i think this is a small but great opportunity we have to step and break up this anyone open for the best practices practices that have been frankly on the tobaccos of working-class men and women for generations this is an opportunity for this city to call in question the ceo pay

supervisor kim have had several conversations about figuring out creative ways to make sure that ceos are not making a disproportionate amount of salaries compared to their employees at the bottom and hope to continue to work with her and work on some wlfks i also want to revive the conversation that supervisor avalos made about the municipal bank to figure out exactly what that would look like so as i mentioned before supervisor avalos please add me as a proud porn to this. >> thank you, thank you supervisor yee. >> thank you supervisor president london breed i want to thank supervisor avalos for bringing this forward to us and also like to be added as a co-author or co-sponsor of that

legislation. >> i was with an that vetoed tell to amend the bond piece during the budget process and so i'm really glad our bringing this what you're calling a compromise language since the budget committee meeting i gotten to understand a little bit more about what the impact will be in regards to whether or not wells fargo will be allowed to bid on the bonds issuance and, yes, that will happen but not as great as i thought to be truthful the sometimes, we have to make that statement even though that costs us as a city we can't be doing best with corrupt organizations and so i just wanted to make that statement that if - come

july next year if we don't get the report that we need you would be there to reverse this vote he took in terms of bond measure thank you very much. >> thank you supervisor yee supervisor kim. >> thank you. i have not to take the opportunity to thank supervisor avalos i think that is incredibly are important how we invest taxpayer dollars into our community but invest our dollars in companies and this is a scandal of one of our large banks that came out of california learning about how they defrauded thousand of customers everyday san franciscans by opening up the fraudulent bank accounts and the

unique that came forward 5 three hundred employees got fired and the dhufs got a slap on the waste this is unacceptable and great to come out and accept responsibility to we expect fare more of the constitution institutions so i'm glad they understand there are penalty for defrauding our residents here and just to concur with the words that supervisor cowen and what i've talked about earlier about our shrinking marching and growing poor and wealthy household until san francisco we really, really need to take on this issue and looking at the ceo to average worker pay

growing by one thousand percent over the last thirty years to the point a ceo makes three hundred and 7 three hundred more than their average working in the 50s and 60s far more narrow that is important that question take an important position on wells fargo but also on any other companies that are really just underpaying their workers and so thank you to supervisor avalos for your work on the measure and happy to be a co-sponsor. >> seeing no other names on the roster, colleagues, can we take that same house, same call? without objection the resolution is adopted as amended unanimously madam clerk call items 14 and 19 through 27 together. >> a resolution to ask the fire department to accept and

extend a documents to purchase equipment pursuant to the terms the of administration of the trust andes stat of russel item 19 a resolution to authors the rec and park department to accept and expend a grant of one hundred thousand dollars for the abandoned grant program administrative code by the state of california to abate costs for hauling out and disposal of abandoned vessels in the harbor and approve a grant with the receptionist for acceptance and grant services through september 2018. >> and item 20 a resolution to authorize the general manager the public works to accept and expend a grant from the - items

21 and 22 a retroactive to accept and expend one and 50 thousand for the insult of heartache for the career and patient oriented substance addressing hiv through august 2017 and item 22 is a resolution to accept and expend a grant from the water control board for public beach through june 2017 and item 24 a resolution to accept and expend a grant the cdc and preservation to climatic change through 2015

and item 27 a resolution to accept and expend approximately nine hundred plus from the centers for disease control and prevention to participate in a program called national hiv through december 2016 and i'm going back to item 22 is item 23 pardon me is item 23 that authorizes the department of the environment and a retroactive authorization to accept and expend a grant from the association of be sure government to perform various activities as part of the energy program through 2016 and item 25 is the retroactive authorization to accept and expend a grant from the united states department of energy exorcise the boarding for the construction of fueling stations

and fuel sell engines the greater san francisco bay area through 2018 and item 26 a resolution to accept and expend a grant introduce pg&e company to continue and energy use and demand through energy efficient through 2019 and item 28 and 29 are two resolutions madam clerk i if call items 28 and 29. >> great, thank you. >> colleagues, can we take that same house, same call? without objection those resolutions are adopted unanimously back to items 15 a 16 call them together please. are two airport service

contracts before the san francisco international airport and a lease with san francisco, llc for a terminal 3 retail marketplace with to one year to extend a minimum guarantee of 3 point plus million dollars and the aviation to provide airport and guest assistance initiative 11 plus million dollars through 2018 with 3, two year options extend. >> seeing no other names on the roster, colleagues, can we take that same house, same call? without objection those resolutions are adopted unanimously item number 17 you see a resolution to authorize the general manager of the public utilities commission to execute a concrete poles and system, llc using wireless d.b.a. as ata and lp do something about as verizon

for a 12 year term and item 18 madam president and no just item number 17. >> supervisor peskin and roll call please. roll call on item no. 7. >> supervisor tang supervisor yee supervisor avalos supervisor breed supervisor campos supervisor cowen supervisor farrell supervisor kim supervisor mar supervisor peskin no there are 9 i's and with an no with supervisor peskin in the descent. >> the resolution is adopted please call item 18. >> a resolution to consent to the use of outside increment to be deposited in the property taxes trusting to fund the

housing that the investment & infrastructure is to build under he's construction. >> commissioner tang supervisor yee. >> supervisor avalos supervisor breed supervisor campos supervisor cowen supervisor farrell supervisor kim supervisor mar supervisor peskin there are 10 i's. >> the resolution is adopted unanimously madam clerk call items 28 and 29 together. >> are to resolutions it approve two unlitigated claims the claim was filed in 2016 by amy against the st. city for

60 thousand and item 29 claim filed in 2015 against the city for $73,000 for property damage. >> colleagues, can we take that same house, same call? without objection the resolutions are duped unanimously item thirty. >> an ordinance to amend the planning code to create an alternative for payrolls to director the affordable housing fee to the smmz small site program and to make the appropriate findings. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you madam president colleagues i'm proud of that piece of legislation and proud to be working with mia's this has come before us. >> i want to thank the planning department, the mayor's office of housing, my staff sheila for working on this piece of legislation it actually says

that for the smaller projects that are paid on the promotions these fees will 2, 3, 4 turn be used within the neighborhood with those projects are located and essentially allows for the impact that a project has to actually lead to a direct benefit that money in turn will protect the hires in that neighborhood i'm proud. >> thank again mayor ed lee for working with us on this and i think that as we're dealing with how we not only build now housing but protect housing has to be all hands on deck a way of working and thinking outside the box and thank you to the tenant groups that worked to make that happen as well as the residential builders association for in their collaboration and respectfully ask for your

support. >> supervisor campos seeing no other names on the roster, colleagues, can we take that same house, same call? without objection the ordinance passes unanimously on the first reading. >> please read item 31. >> an ordinance for the rec and park department to install a memorial for furtherance of this ordinance with a permit and institutionalizing inspection fees for the rec and park ceqa determination. >> supervisor avalos. >> first of all, i want to thank (calling names) for being here and for their patience. >> (clapping.) >> please stand. >> (speaking spanish.) >> thank you for waiting through all the items we're talking

about today >> (speaking spanish.) >> in bernal heights and working on building whether to have a memorial to honor this is your son who lost his life in 2014 on bernal heights park i knew alex worked with him an advocate back in 2000 and 2009 one he was a youth contaminate a youth and bernal heights center and the executive order would come with alex as advocates where i was working tatd and knowing knew alex be dedicated young man that of those doing a lot of community work that was instilled by his parents and

schools in the bernal area and alex dedicatedism to education and working on getting his certifying at the city college to became a probation officer and dedicated to helping to give a lot of young people a chance to have greater opportunities and away from the streets and giving back to the experience he had growing up other than that day he was shot he was you know under recent a court case about that incident and the officers involved found to be x-rated by the courts but the community felt that alex was

gunned down with the offer use of force and that incident and the pain reverberate through bernal heights and the excelsior and places where alex lived and the community was around him because of pa pain a huge need to find some sense of healing at that spot there is roadway currently a shine this is there an alter and his parents frequent to you talked with alex and get close to him and get a sense of what transpired ♪ area where their son lived and they continue to live i canned think of anything that will mark

what san francisco has been introduce we've seen a number of young men and women that have been gunned down by people who work for the san francisco police department i regardless of how you feel it was justified the shootings were justified or not but were going to mark an experience people have in san francisco that people have had in different places that's what this memorial is about, about this time we have other dreams that torn apart our communities and our families i think if we acknowledge that those incidents have happened it brings us closure to the finding we need to have a city that really lives up to its values so i've been honored to work on this ordinance and this

ordinance essentially would you know require a or director rec and park to install a memorial the memorial has not been designed there is that language has been talked about where the community is going through a process to understand the right design and the language to be there and this will go have not arts commission that goes to the process how to approve public art the communities is also discussed raising money themselves for the mural for the memorial and i do think that that could be you know some of the city could do in the future the intent has been the community will come together to you know raise in part the funds to me that is also a way that the community can strengthen and

grow and look after each other that is the essence of community safety is about and the community that all about in memorial how we can bring a community together and healing to a site there guess tremendous tragedy and how we can bring a sense of understanding how the many losses we've experience in recent years when patrol officers use of force with less discretion than they should as we're seeing we're trying to change policies around the use of force and thank you to the colleagues and thank you to jeramy pollack his work in me office and the communities of folks that came together across

many of the recent shootings that have happened a lot of few weeks that have come as you can see to back and thank you for doing this that is how we show what san francisco is all about so with that, colleagues ifd to have our support thank you >> thank you . >> (clapping.) >> supervisor campos. >> thank you, very much. madam president and thank you to supervisor avalos and jeremy pollack and his staff and thank you to carolyn in my office for all the work to put is this together to so forth to the community especially the family for their perseverance and their patience throughout the process.

>> (speaking spanish.) >> you know it is a bittersweet day supervisor avalos and supervisor mar that is our last meeting at the board of supervisors and one of the issues that i think you know leaves me with a great deal of of thinking with a heavy heart the issue where we are today police reform many things unresolved we have a number of cases and alex being one of them that on so many levels haven't given a satisfactory conclusion for the families of the victims within the things i've learned through the process of being here and alm that something did

happen is how even though you can't bring back someone that was fell as alex did at the hands of our police this is something to be said for that acknowledging and remembering i think that happened with mario woods i think that the families basically saying they want that as well i think in the context of everything else we've failed to do so far in many respect the least we can do and westbound can't bring alex back and we subtle have to

>> that's the place where this incident happened so i think we have an opportunity and quite frankly to have an opportunity to turn something tragic and

something positive. this does and as resident, i'm proud this will be placed and done in a way the community can provide their $0.02 and again to the parents of nieto, i can't bring your son back. >> we're thinking with you and we want to hear together. >> [spanish] >> thank you. >> thank you supervisor campos.

>> supervisor farrell. speaker: i want to acknowledge supervisor avalos -- he has spoken about this. so if i say i'm sorry for the loss for our community in particularly for the parents, you know, and any tragedy like this is horrific, but i cannot support this ordinance today. most importantly because in my mind, what this message -- >> audience booing] speaker: this is an emotional topic, but i would ask you respect our process and allow us to continue. they will be a vote on this matter and there are some members who will have a different type of opinion. i ask that you allow members of the board to express their opinion as you know. there's applause and booing in support of opposition is prohibited in the chamber. please allow us an opportunity to have a

discussion and get through this. thank you for your patience. >> thank you president breed and most importantly for me because of what it's sending to the police department who put their lives on the line for us everyday in san francisco. our board is more concerned about honoring those that have fallen and been killed by police officers for reasons, but we do not recognize -- >> excuse me a second. excuse me. if the out burst continue to persists, unfortunately i will have to recess the meeting. so i'm asking members of the public, again, out of respect for the family who is here today, can you please allow us to continue to move forward with this. and if you want to support words that are being said, just waive your hands, if you oppose anything, please just use the thumb's down and we will see you.

thank you. supervisor farrell. >> thank you supervisor breed. we don't recognize the police officer killed or injured in the line of duty protecting us as residents. many fallen officers of the past years come to mind. officer downs was shot in the head. nothing was talked about. our san francisco residents and people that risk their lives everyday to protect the residents of san francisco, and in the mist of our heat debates which i appreciate and is fair game, but over the past year, somehow i think we have lost sight of that. we have forgotten the debt we owe to the men and women and someone needs to speak for them. and i am not talking about the poa or any other group involved in this debate. but for me, among other things, it's the people i grew up in san francisco who have been apart of our police, fire and sheriff's department for years. those that i see on the weekends are at kid's soccer game and have been apart of san francisco for

generations and those men and women in our public safety department that moved to san francisco because they believed in public service and they believed in the clear -- a career in public safety and have dedicated their careers to protect us. my vote is for them. >> supervisor cohen. speaker: what's scary and it's unfortunate is we cannot honor a loss of life period. a loss of life is a loss period whether it's law enforcement or whether it's a community person. and i think it's incredibly disingenuous and alarming that you can't support something -- you can't be one way without being fearful of being called racist or misinterpreting your actions that you're on one side. the reality is if law enforcement or if anyone wants to be recognized, all they have to do is ask the same way the community has made an ask. this is the first time. one thing that has made me

uncomfortable about this ask was that how do we honor and up lift alex nieto without putting a shadow on other members who have -- we've lost along the way because alex isn't the only one. alex wasn't the last one. but it was the community that organized and have made this ask. it's a humble ask. it's not too much to ask for. and i would be happy to sponsor something for the poa. happy to sponsor something for the firefighters. this is not an us or them. it doesn't have to be that simple. it doesn't have to be gray or black or white and cut and straight dry. this is an opportunity for us to come together. this should be healing. this should be bringing peace. instead this kind of conversation is tearing us apart. we need a national day of remembrance, to remember everybody that has died one way or the other. for every

officer shot in head or killed, their life matters. it's terrible. it's violence. that's what we need to be standing up and remembering. how violence touches everyone. i'm going to be supporting this. this memorial and i'm going to be supporting of future memorials should anyone of my colleagues want to bring for law enforcement because every -- every -- every -- thank you, every life does matter and i don't say that to my gate the black or brown community and the struggle because that's very real. that is very real, but we can honor alex. alex represents many men and women that have died. it's not just about alex nieto and to be fair, law enforcement has

their private ceremony and memorials that they conduct for those officers they have lost in the line of duty. the baby station has an annual one where they get together for a soul that was lost several years ago in the line of duty. so come on. this is -- this is tearing us apart and it needs to be building us together. this pain that binds us. this is hurt that binds us. this is love. that's all i got to say. >> thank you supervisor cohen. supervisor peskin. >> thank you madam president and colleagues. first of all, when a police officer is shot or killed, we as members of the board of supervisors, i think each and every one of us go

that that funeral. when officer kevin downs was shot, i drove out there at 11:00 at night to san francisco general hospital and said hi to his father. these are not mutually exclusive things. i think when we get in this die ma'am is -- dynamic we can't honor a citizen of san francisco who was tragically killed in a hale of bullets, that plays in to this whole mentality that is at the root of the problem. we need to have a society where we can honor the working men and women of the police department and the dangers they face and we can honor members of our community tragically killed. these are not exclusive. i think they benefit one another. i think when the police officer -- police officer's

association knows that we take the loss of life of one of our citizens as seriously as we take the loss of life of one of our officers, that sends a powerful message. so i don't think we should go back to the old day dynamics of we can't honor this individual because it's somehow disrespects the police. that's fundamentally not true. >> thank you supervisor peskin. speaker: supervisor campos. >> i respect everyone's views, and i think what's painful about what i just heard is that the argument about how supporting or remembering someone who died in an incident involving the police is disrespectful to the police officers and the department -- and an argument that was made for the day of mario woods. we

heard that precisely from the poa. and at that point, we responded by saying we respectful disagree. we're ready if there's a need or desire to recognize of contributions of any police officer to do that. we said to the poa, our doors are open. tell us what it is we're not doing. and we specifically rejected that false choice in having done that and actually establish a president for recognizing the memory of someone who fell out of an incident, what does it say to the family that we're willing to do that with 1 person, but not another. if that argument is the argument that we were going to follow, we should have

followed it before, but i think that -- i mean it's painful actually. does it matter that this person, you know, comes from where they come from? i mean, i mean, it's actually very painful. and i think it's very unfortunate and i think that to the poa, i would say you know, as i've said since i've been on the -- when i was on the police commission, you don't serve your members well when you try to make that false choice. it is not mutually exclusive. we can honor the men and women of the police department and still recognize the memory. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor campos. no names on the roster, madam clerk, can you please call the roll. >> item 31, supervisor tang. speaker: aye. >> tang aye. . >> yee aye. speaker: avalos. >> aye. >> supervisor breed. >> aye. >> campos. >> aye. >> supervisor cohen.

>> aye. >> supervisor farrell. >> no. speaker: supervisor kim. speaker: aye. >> supervisor mar. >> aye. >> supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> there are nine aye and one no with farrell -- >> this item passes on the first reading. [ cheering ] >> thank you everyone. >> thank you everyone so much for being here and congratulations. we're going to

>> all right. thank you everyone. we are back. madam clerk. let's go to -- >> where ever we left off. speaker: committee reports. >> let me skip to the committee reports. >> item 50 and 51 were considered by the oversight committee at a special meeting on thursday, december 8th. and were recommended as committee reports. item 50 is an ordinance to amend the governmental conduct code to require members of the city board and commissions to file the payment reports regarding the solicitation of charitable contributions. >> okay. supervisor peskin. >> thank you madam president. colleagues, i'll be brief. i want to thank supervisor's yee and breed for their support of this item in committee which i introduced in may of this year which would impose certain limited reporting requirements on our city commissioners and

board members, requirements which apply to all of us elected officials via state regulation. our city as we know has a unique system of commissions and boards which are largely comprised of volunteers from various fields and have immense power to give fines or improve licenses or land use entitles. today is a piece of legislation that shed light on how the public officials wheel their influences from parties that appear before them or from agents. i would like to make a couple of notes. first this proposal was narrow than the reporting requirement that's apply to us, having heard from our city's commissioner and board members, many of who hold day jobs at nonprofits, it's critical we create a system that's not burden some or prevent these board members from serving. second with respect to our standing concerns about the scope of

this requirement, i've communicated with our elt -- ethics department and we look forward to working with them and working independently to develop rule and regulations to achieve -- while making sure it remains tailored to shine light. i want to thank the board of secretaries who have worked with my staff to help make this legislation better and i would also like to thank my staff, lee hepner for his work on it. just a few relevant facts. the threshold reporting amount is $1,000. as i have said, it's only for those be hefted payments for people that are actually practicing or appearing in front of that commission much narrower than what we have. and received unanimous support from the ethics commission. it won't be effective until

january 1st of 2017. they'll establish a form for filing and the ethics commission will give rules and regulations around implementation and with that, i hope to get your support. >> thank you, supervisor peskin. colleagues, seeing no other names on the roster. madam clerk, can you please call the roll. >> item 50, supervisor tang. >> aye. >> supervisor yee. >> aye. >> supervisor avalos. >> aye. >> supervisor breed. >> aye. >> supervisor campos. >> aye. >> supervisor cohen. speaker: aye. >> supervisor farrell. >> aye. >> supervisor kim. >> aye. >> supervisor mar. >> aye. >> supervisor peskin >> aye. >> there are ten ayes. >> the ordinance passes on the first read. >> item 51. >> it has the same title. it's to direct the clerk of the board to issue an subpoena

duces tecum and other -- for issuance to jack moehle to appear on the oversight committee at 9:30 a.m. or for a future date to be determined by the chair and to be noticed by the clerk. to provide oral information and to respond to questions regarding the design engineering review and approval process for the projects at 301 mission and 80 atoma street. >> colleagues can we take this vote. same house, same call. without objection, the item is approved. madam clerk, please call the next item. >> item 52-55 are considered by the land use and transportation committee meeting on december 21st. 53-53 were forwarded. item 52 was not. >> let's go to item 53 >> that's an ordinance to amend

the planning code to add 29.15 to create the mission and 9th special use district. and to amend zoning map sheet ht 07 to change the height limb o -- limit. >> supervisor kim. >> i want to say a few words. this was before the full board last tuesday and again we have now made the increase of affordable middle housing units which was a commission hearing and accepted by the project sponsor. i want to thank the project sponsor and the community for their work on this building. this is really a project that is looking at the concept we talked about, the dial, and on site is including units of housing all the way from dead -- i ask for your support today.

>> thank you, supervisor kim. colleagues can we take this item, same house, same call. >> madam president, supervisor avalos. >> the house that's changed, madam clerk, item 53. call the roll. >> item 53, supervisor tang. speaker: aye. >> supervisor yee. >> aye. >> supervisor avalos. >> aye. >> supervisor breed. >> aye. >> supervisor campos. >> aye. >> supervisor cohen. >> aye. >> supervisor farrell. >> aye. >> supervisor kim. >> aye. >> supervisor mar. >> aye. >> supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> there are ten ayes. >> the ordinance passes unanimously on the first reading. item number 54. >> item 54 was recommended as amended. it's a resolution to declare the board of board of supervisor to order the vacation of easements that exist in 1-a and 1-b of the mark said -- set a hearing date for january 10th. for all

persons interested in the proposed vacation of public -- here this chamber, room 250. >> the house that's has changed. the resolution is adopted. >> item 55, it's a resolution to extend intrim zoning controls that require conditional use authorization for medical cannabis dispensary in the living judah and -- to make the appropriate finding. >> same house, same call. the resolution is adopted. >> 53-60 was considered by the neighborhood services committee at a regular meeting on thursday, december 8th and were forwarded as committee reports. item 56 is to amend the

environment code to modify restrictions on the sale or distribution on city property on drinking water in single service containers to educate city departments regarding these restrictions and to make environmental findings. >> supervisor mar. >> thank you for your support for this bottle free ordinance. i want to thank campos -- our coalition of corporate accountability international are environmental and water access coalition which includes corporate inter nation and save the bay, and the story of stuff and the center for biological diversity have found that our 2014 law had huge loophole in it. this is in an effort to modernize and close those loopholes to san francisco can move forward as plastic single use water bottle free and

packaged free as well. this will move us toward our zero waste goals. by expanding the size of the bottles and packaged water that applies to this ordinance, strengthening the enforcement in the city reduce the use of plastic water bottles and also ensure our department of the environment is the overseer or the guardian. this extends our bottle free access to have increasing -- to our public water system with drink tap station and other efforts from our rec and park departments, school district and throughout the city. this ordinance also expands to include a 5-gallon size plastic water container. moving from 28 ounces all the

way up to 5-gallon and it supports promoting of public water, not privatization of water through the over use of single use plastic water bottle and other packaged water. in 2014, we passed a historic, maybe the first in the nation law with now assembly men david chu, but the coalition remains to stay active to reduce plastic pollution and to increase water access with drink tap stations throughout the city. we would have expanded to 100 new drinking stations by 2015 and with allocations of roughly 600,000 to the puc and the school district over the next 2 years 2 years expanding it more. it has had an impact on our environment and marine pollution in our oceans. this amends our environment code to

modify restrictions on the sale and distribution on our city properties of single use containers while educating city departments on the restrictions. this ordinance strengthens our enforcement and also creates greater accountability by having the department of the environment oversee the ordinance. bottled and packages water in san francisco needlessly harms our environment. in san francisco we have the best source of pure water and we should be promoting and make such access expanded as much as possible. this is about moving towards a culture of being bottle free and promoting access to our public water. the material used for bottled water, singled use bottle water is not recycle in san francisco or much of it isn't, and that goes for boxed water and other types of containers like plastic bags that contain water these days. so these items will likely wind up in landfill and sometimes as litter, definitely on ocean beach where i live, we see so

much of the caps and plastic bottles, straws and other types of plastic pollution. almost all packaged water sold on the market today, boxes, plastic bottles and bags contain types of plastic, part of a growing epidemic of plastic waste that impacted our marine. it has a greater environmental impact in drinking from a municipal water source like a tap or using reusable water bottles. resources are used from extraction to disposal to extract it from the ground, as we go to var gas -- water is life. it should not be privatized and i think really ensuring we have public access to water is so important to our city. it takes three leaders of water to produce 1 liter of packaged water and the package water industry produced 2.5 million tons of co2 so the foot

print is overwhelming for a city like us. i want to thank the public works facility especially john, but from our san francisco unified school district, the sustainability coordinator nick who is over the years both have advanced water access and to bring drink tap stations throughout the city especially in low income communities. on the drink tap stations installed through the city, i'll say they are helping ensure equity in many of our neighborhoods. this ordinance is a step forward in protecting our environment and discouraging the use of single use plastic water bottles and i hope as i and other colleagues leave the board, that my colleagues and cosponsors will continue to build on this legacy with the task force that's looking at plastic pollution, so that we build on this legacy of environmentalism and sustainability for our city. lastly, acknowledging the organizations that have been there from the start,

again, corporate accountability international which worked with our former mayor to make san francisco one of the first bottle free city in this country, but also more recently -- the firefighter foundation, but clean water action, save the bay, bay keeper, fly jiers and biological -- the two amendments that were mentioned in our public safety neighborhood services committee that i have given to all of you are very simple. one is a simple amendment that defines packaged water meaning drinking water in a single sealed bag or sealed box, bag, can, glass bottle, rigged plastic bottle or other container 5 gallons or less and having a capacity of 5 gallons or less. the second amendment that i'm proposing for you and that i'm moving today is proposing to remove

section 2406d, given that department's responsible may seek from the department of the environment a waiver and then it strikes out a number of words in that language. so it really ensures the department of the environment is the overseer of this policy. colleagues thank you to supervisor farrell and cohen for cosponsoring and i urge you to support this as amended. speaker: supervisor mar has made a motion to amend, seconded by supervisor farrell. can we take the amendments -- oh you want -- supervisor yee. >> supervisor mar and president, the amendments, they do include the 5-gallon or less? was that an amendment made before? >> supervisor mar. >> thank you, president breed. my first amendment is including the 5 gallons or less.

>> in the -- is that 5-gallon or less include -- does that 5-gallon or less is what we see in our offices, in a lot of the offices in the city. the dispensaries. >> when former mayor implemented his executive order reducing the use of single use plastic water bottles, i know our office eliminated the water, the big water container in our office. in our city, our best source tap water come from our hedge reservoir, not from imported plastic jugs. with the city, we spend somewhat -- some where around $98,000 a year on this type of water in our offices. what i do in my office is we have pitchers of water that's provided to folks so that we're

not using more and more plastic and that we are being consistent in policies like this. this policy was strongly urged by our department of the environment and i would strongly urge support for it. >> and i guess the question -- this is considered a single use container then? that's why i'm confused. i thought they keep on using it. >> so it would be the type of plastic container that would be covered under this ordinance. >> the only concern i have with introducing it today is as an amendment is whether or not other departments and -- it seems like nobody had a chance to weigh in terms of what's the impact on them. >> so i know my -- from the committee meeting to my staff sharing with all of your

offices, we had a number of days to discuss this and i know that you and i did not talk about it, but i'm trying to be consistent with the recommendations from our department of the environment. it's a simple amendment, supervisor yee. >> supervisor yee, would you like us to consider moving to other items and returning to this at a later time in the agenda? >> yeah, i need some time to think about -- >> you wouldn't object that to supervisor mar. we'll hold off on this item and return at a later time in our agenda. madam clerk, can you please call items 57 through 59. >> item 57 through 59 are three

resolutions that transfer liquor licenses for item 57. it's a transfer of a type 21 off sale general license to trader llc located at 1909 union street. suite a. item 58 is a type 21 off sale general license to whole foods market california ink low indicated at 1150 ocean avenue. item 59 is a type 51 club license to the common wealth club of california. located at 110 embar -- >> can we take those items, same house same call. >> they're adopted. item 60. >> it's a resolution to urge the police department and the mayor to require the police chief reside within the city. >> supervisor yee. >> i wanted to point out this is the advisory. although i

wish we had time to make it more of a requirement. i have mentioned this at committee that for instance, when someone was on the school board, we required the superintendent to live in the city if he was to work as a superintendent in san francisco. the only person that we hire is a department head as the ta head, and we ask that of that particular person also. and on top of that, the police chief used to be required to live in san francisco, so what i'm asking you is that you support -- that we ask the police commission and the mayor to look into this to see if [inaudible] required. >> okay. seeing no other names on the roster colleagues, can we take this item, same house, same call. >> without objection, the resolution is adopted unanimously.

item number 61. >> 61 and 62 were considered by the rules committee on december 8th and were forwarded as committee reports. item 61 is to -- it's an ordinance amending the administrative -- >> colleagues can we take this item, same house, same call. it passes unanimously. >> item 62. >> it's a motion to appoint brenda knee and alexander tonisson. speaker: same house, same call. >> the motion is approved. item 63. >> item 63-45 were considered by the rules committee at a regular meeting and forwarded as item reports. it has a new

title for item 63. it's a motion to appoint nine members to the ball boy y'all park station community advisory committee for 2-year materials ending february 8th, 2019, for tiffany, raft ya'll and glen da hope, robert, fay dennis, and jesse fernandez. >> supervisor cohen. good thank you very much. i'd like to speak on item 64. >> okay. >> we're on 63. >> i thought you called all 63, 64, 65 together. my apologies. >> supervisor avalos. >> thank you, i want to put in a quick word for the applicants, the members of the -- the city members of the -- for balboa. they have been

doing a good thing looking at affordable housing and i can't think of a better committee we could have to do this work of overseeing development, transportation needs around balboa park station. colleagues, i urge your support. >> supervisor mar. >> i was going to say out of the rules committee, the tremendous body -- committee organizers to small business advocates to pedestrian leaders, but what a great committee that's going to move forward a lot of the vision that supervisor avalos and many others have put into this. i'm commending the appointees and looking forward to working with that committee for the future of the balboa park station area. >> thank you. colleagues can we take this item, same house, same call. without objection, the motion is approved unanimously. >> item 64.

>> item 64 is a motion that was recommended with a new title appointing bill hing to the police commission term ending april 30, 2018, >> commissioner cohen. >> i want to speak in general to the several qualified candidates that applied and expressed interest in the police commission. it was an interesting discussion. just by way of background, i want to start with just the -- about the police commission and the purpose of this body. the mission of the police commission is to set policy for the san francisco police department and to conduct disciplinary hearing on charges of police misconduct filed by the police of chief, excuse me, by the chief of police or the director of the office of citizen's complaint which is now the director of the department of police accountability. this person -- this role -- this commission is charged with a duty to impose

discipline in such cases as warranted and here, police officers appeals from the discipline imposed by the police chief. this is an oversight body that sets policy for the police department. the commissioners are appointed by the mayor's office and the board of supervisors and they oversee the police department and the office of police accountability. the commission also appoint and regulates patrol special officers and they also may suspend or dismiss patrol officers after hearings or charges are filed. so, for me, this committee hearing, the name that was brought before us is a brilliant professor bill ong hing and i'm going to make a motion that we not appoint

professor bill hing but appoint john. for me it's a simple question. it comes down to one question on the application, and that question is a public document, have you ever attended a police commission meeting? period. it's simple. have you ever attended a police commission hearing? and while i respect the professor, and his legal experience in deep community ties, his professional record is astounding, his accomplishments, it's resolved around immigrant defense and the immigration policy development. he hasn't demonstrated to me that he has an interest or an expertise outside of immigration. i want

to highlight that professor ong hs hing answered no. no he hasn't ever attended a police commission meeting. and by his own description during his interview and from his resume -- it's limited and it's limited to the immigration field. and this is a really critical time. this is a critical role at a unique moment in history when we need an appointee with expertise who is a bridge to boast to the public and the poa. we need an experienced advocate who has the time, the talent, the ability engage stakeholders across all identities, and i think that's absolutely critical. all identities. it's apparent to me that mr.

john is the most qualified for the seat. mr. homosoci have the experience we need on the commission through his decades of working as a criminal defense attorney. his work to humanize those most directly and disproportionately targeted by sfpd. mr. homosocki did his due diligence in applying for this role and yes he has attended several police commission meetings. i have seen him there personally. prior to his application, he took 6-week to go out into the community and talk to police officers, to talk with the public, to talk to members of the board of supervisors and talk with his current colleagues and talk with members on the commission to get a deep understanding of the role of a commissioner and the role the police commission plays in this city. i have heard from many advocates and my office have received

thousands of letters, numerous e-mails, calls of recommendations for both gentlemen. but mr. homosocki have received support from folks on both sides of the aisle, from the community and the police side. and you heard earlier, the remarks that we need someone that is able to connect with both sides. as a supervisor who has been most deeply involved in police accountability reform, some of you may argue that, but in the most recent -- campos is like, yeah. okay. campos has me trumped by a few years, but i'm picking up the mantle supervisor avalos and supervisor -- i'm picking it were you're dropping it down. i have been involved in the ability reform. i have -- i've brought two to vote vote have passed with 80% approval ratings. so i do feel like i have a unique quality that i'm

bringing here and i have a lens that i'm looking into this candidates, i have a unique understanding and i have a phenomenal grasp of what the commission needs and what values we need to have already instilled, not made up or manufacture erred that exist in the appointee. it's my hope that -- those will reconsider what came out the rules committee. i want to commit on something. if i was uncomfortable with the -- that was displayed in the hearing and the testimony. it's critical that we as members of the board of supervisors, we're entrusted to make the best decisions for all of san francisco. every nook and cranny from public housing on down. and look objectively at the application that have been

submitted and make a decision solely based on the qualifications for that role. so in my opinion, it is without question the person most qualified for this appointment at this time is mr. john homosocki. our public defender, rudy, united play -- shawn richard. former police commissioner as well as agent law caucus member or employee. jesus which is a -- she helped us with the joint committee meeting that we had with the police commission last month.

jennifer. i love jennifer, but the coalition of homeless is supporting this candidate. adrian tartanoti who is the director of the baby hunter's community leader who ironically is a student of -- a former student of professor bill hing and paul who was here earlier, john cruise from the acla police practice and vinny who speaks often on mental health, particularly mental -- he's apart of the mental health working group and also fyi, a manager at tartine. i can hook you up. see me afterwards. back to business. the asian american bar association which is the largest apr bar association in the united states. it has close to 1,000 members. this includes muslim attorneys that's concerned about islam phobia. he's chair of the -- officers for justice which is a police union for

police officers of color specifically african american. the san francisco for police accountability and just to add a celebrity touch, dura from black lives matter just for a little celebrity. in full transparency, i received 38 letters of recommendations from professor criminal defense, high school student and college students and other san francisco ans. -- san franciscans. >> this is an incredible candidate that deserves our attention and our support. so please i'm asking you to not affirm the rules committee's findings, but support my motion to appoint mr. john homsocki to the police commission. i want to also recognize that we have

both candidates that are here in the chamber today. if you have questions for them, please i encourage you to reach out to them and ask them directly. the one question that boils down, have you attended a police commission meeting. that's the number one question. do you know what you're stepping into? are you paying attention, are you at the table or did you wake up and get in the game. thank you. >> supervisor cohen has made a motion, is there a second? >> seconded by supervisor avalos. >> supervisor mar. >> i'll speak against the motion and i appreciate supervisor cohen's passion about the issues that many of us care deeply about. but your fact was wrong about mr. hamasoci. he has been a lawyer since 2008, not for decades. he has had really great experience and i know he's very passionate when i met with him

and lots of my close allies support him. when you put his record next to bill hing, julie sue, robert hersh and others we did, and that's what i did, meeting and talking to everyone, it's clear who the most qualified one for the police commission is. i respect mr. hamasoci's work beginning as a clerk and my close friends and colleagues have spoken for him, but that alone is not enough. i think with the national lawyer skill and the work with the -- like i did when i came out of law school was important and i really respect that work he has done, but what i see with, fir example and i'll start by bill hing, it's 40 years. the san francisco -- or the important

units like the immigration unit, he helped develop and our neighborhood vehicles foundation. i'm not going to go into his ex-tensive record. it's not just immigrant rights. he's seen as a racial justice and extremely wise leader on so many different levels. if you even read the -- the howard law journal which is the african american journal law school and journal piece on disrupting race based policing, looking at cases from ferguson to the 12-year-old tamir rice in cleveland killing to the black lives matter movement rise to many other movements, bill hing has been a champion of multi racist justice. when i look at candidates, i try to put along side their deep relationships with different community based groups and i think professor hing to jewelry sue emphasized those deep relationships if their testimony. from julie sue's leadership on the

commission on the status of women heard deep roots with domestic violence and human trafficking to so many other issues she brought out and the relationships with people not only in the chinese and asian pacific islanders, but with other commuters, i think mr. hamosoci is developing those relationships. when i put their records side by side, but following in the former -- who also came out of immigrant rights movements. at this point in history, depending our city sanctuary ordinance and the dignity of immigrant people really respectful relationships within communities of color so that we deescalate conflicts is so important. and i know sue and professor hing and mr.

hamsosoci -- we need a leader like bill hing. i hope we have other seats we can consider the others. but i think for this position, identity politics are -- since you raised it, i don't choose a candidate because they're asian or pacific islander. i look for people who have deep relationships that know who the community, know how to talk to different groups within that community, but also others across racial ethnic and class line and i think that's why bill hing has that experience. his long list of various public application to his teaching, there's a stereotype of law professors that's ivory towered people. bill hing from the 1980s working with the latinos and

asian islanders community -- to me it's so important. when we first looked at the candidates, we saw there weren't people that had that much experience. that was my first question to our former police commissioners and angela sxhang -- chang. let's choose the most experienced with the deeper relationships that can break beyond police reform and racial justice to immigrant rights and so many other things, and that's why bill hing, professor inning, hing is the right choice. i have respect for -- people didn't know that bill hing applied and if they had known they would have supported him. i would say that robert hersh also who has withdrawn his name was strongly supported by eva paterson. and my mentor

from the law caucus. right now, we have a stellar police commissioner bill hing who is poised at this time in his tore other on the attack of immigrant rights and african americans -- hing can focus on you -- i speak against the motion by my colleague supervisor cohen. >> thank you, supervisor mar. supervisor tang. >> thank you. i do want to say ditto to everything that supervisor mar and also encourage us to take a step back from this. we have three incredibly qualified candidates who i said in rules committee that i would support any of them to serve on the police commission. i'm glad that we have seen this level of interest of quality candidates come forward during this difficult time to serve on a very difficult commission where all eyes are on that commission not only in san francisco but

elsewhere as well. so i want to say we're lucky to be in the spot where we have people vying for this position. for me, i'll back up, supervisor mar because of the long 40-year plus track record he has. i did raise a question in committee about the perception that, as supervisor mar mentioned that professors are in their classrooms and writing about things, but you know, he did answer and i have seen this myself too that he writes about things that he's involved in, that he has worked on. and so again he's not just theorizing or -- he's out there in the community, sometimes when i'm contacting him or so forth, he's in mexico or he's starting up a clinic or whatever it is, he's actually out there. he's a huge activist in the community, so i do believe that he will bring a well set of qualities to the commission to challenge all the different

sets of recommendations that are coming forth before the police department and the commission and to review them with the critical eye to see how it is that we move our police department forward in the best way possible. but again, i think that all three candidates we had were wonderful and i really do hope there's an opportunity for all of them to be involved and continue to be involved in this issue. >> thank you supervisor tang. supervisor campos. >> thank you, i do appreciate the passion that supervisor cohen demonstrated in her presentation. i certainly share her passion about the issue. and i don't know that it's a competition in terms of who have done more. i'm grateful that you're committed to this issue going forward. i think that we need that passion because i think that if i have learned anything since i've been working on police reform

is that it has to be a constant ongoing effort because it's one of those things where you take one step forward and you take two forward and you take two forward and one back, and then so i think it has to be an ongoing push and it really is a push and i'm happy that this issue has been elevated to where it is. i also know president breed is committed to this issue as are some of the other folks that are here, but also the supervisors that are coming in. so you know, what i would say about where we are is one of the things that i think is unfortunate about making the case for mr. homasocey, people felt the need to do that at the expense of other people. i think that there's nothing negative to be said about any one here. and mr. homosoci

when he came to my office and met with me, i was impressed with me. as you know from watching the tape of what he presented, i think he did a very impressive job of making the case as to why he should be appointed and when i said to both mr. homasoci and professor bill hing is i'll be happy to support either one of them. if john had come out of the rule's committee, i would support them. i don't think you follow the rules blindly and god knows there's many times here when i have gone against what the rule's committee has done. there has to be, in my view, a reason not to support the person that came out of rules. and as much as i think if john had come out the rules, i would have supported him. i can't in

good conscious not support bill hing. i think the way in which some people expressed themselves indirectly about professor hing is not fair. there's nothing made up or manufactured about bill hing and his commitment to not just police reform, police transformation, but racial justice and social justice generally. i don't believe this is someone who is coming in, you know, because he just -- just so happens to be interested in this issue last minute. this is someone who has been thinking and working in this area for a long time. and so i don't think that you know, that's necessarily the case and i think that the -- any push to diminish him actually has the opposite effect for me because i don't think that it's -- i don't

think john needs that to look good because he looks good on his own terms just like everyone else. i actually think that the issue of police reform goes beyond this appointment. it goes beyond so many other different things. i think that the problem remains as we saw here today the power of the poa. the power of the police officer's union and the fact that the status quo is you know, in any kind of system changing the status quo is very difficult. but when you have the kind of push back against change that we have from the police union and interim the system itself, it's very challenging. and so you know, we're going to have a number of choices that come up. i believe that professor hing is up to the challenge. i would not be supporting him if he

wasn't. and i'll vote against a motion, not because i don't like john, but because i think that's what came out of committee and i have no basis to oppose that. i think that what i would ask not just this body but the mayor because as the executive, he has the ability to do this, can we please move quickly on the reforms that are needed? can we move quickly on choosing a new chief. is he going to choose the people put forward by this police commission and if not, can we send it back to the police commission because i feel like there's so much uncertainty that's hurt this process. thank you very much, and i look forward to the rest of the discussion. >> supervisor avalos. >> colleagues, i made the mistake that telling the two candidates i supported them and i feel bad about that. i was

impressed with both clearly. and but you know, my mistake is i didn't let either much them what i was thinking when i was thinking it. and not until i was in committee yesterday. and actually i can support either candidate. i really enjoy -- i've met with both candidates and sue, and bill, and hing and john and sue. i spoke with mr. hing on the phone. i was impressed most of all with bill hing and john, and i can support either one of them. but when it came to committee yesterday, and i was sitting in committee on top of my interview with them, and i liked john's temperament i like

the work he's done. the community has been vocal about the use of force reforms that's winning their way through, seen through the police commission and other reform efforts that are being discussed and considered in the police commission and i feel at this moment when we're trying to transform the police department that energy from the community is going to be important and i think bill also has really strong relationships through his work with community groups as well. but in this moment, i really feel like the relationships that john has with the communities that are most directly impacted by the over use of force is something that's optimistic about are the ones that's most important in the process and that relationship to me is really important. that was the tipping point for me. i

support john, his temperament. i liked how he responded to questions and he seemed to be a real dynamic way of responding on the spot, and i believe that's from courtroom experience he has. that's the kind of temperament that's important as the police commission is grappling with important issues so i would like to have a chance to vote for mr. john. i don't think he's got the vote according to what i can see right now. so if just discussing, you know, that i was impressed with him is announced we can withdraw a motion, but i don't think the motion is going to pass from what i can discern. if that's the case, if i can support bill hing. >> i can support bill and i

agree with colleagues that there's not anything about whether one is worse than the other. it's the quality we want to see in a police commission that we want to put forward >> thank you supervisor avalos. since we haven't heard from breed. i'll turn to her. >> president breed. thank you everyone and to all the candidates who i know are in the audience today. thank you for your service and thank you for your interest in applying for this particular decision. you know, this was a hard decision for me, mostly because this is such an important seat. and initially i encouraged bob hersh, i have known him since i was a kid. i used to babysit his kid. he's an amazing person and incredible advocate and i thought he would be a great servant, public servant on the police commission, and would aggressively push for the reform that we so desperately

need with our department and time and time again, conversations held consistently came back to the fact that this seat was a seat that traditionally was held by someone who has -- someone who is of asian and in some specific cases chinese descent and out of respect for that, he withdrew his name. and it left me with a hard decision, mostly because i know julie sue for a long time and her work in the community and i have a lot of less suspect for her. i've heard incredible things about mr. hing and i didn't know mr. homasockey well, so i was rely ongoing the people who reached out to me, the information they provided, their presentations, the conversations, and at the end of the day, you know, i was

really surprised that i had a strong interests in supporting mr. homasockey and it had to do with more so what he was about and what he represented. i think about the fact that you know, as a member of the board of supervisors, i think about my life and how number one, i've lost a cousin who was killed by sfpd. number two, i personally witnessed sfpd beat my cousin and i've seen these incidents personally and experienced it. a lot of police brutality growing up in community and thinking it's normal and there was nothing that could be done about it. and as someone who is fortunate to serve as the board of supervisors, these decisions has consequence and they're so important and it's not to

diminish the accomplishments of the other people, but the people who reached out to me, who reached out to me specifically like rudy from united players and like sean with brothers against guns, those are the people that i actually grew up with and those in -- many of those folks have had challenges in this city and experienced the thing i'm talking about and mr. homasockey has represented those people. he has -- i believe it transformed his understanding when dealing with policy and shaping policy. it's one thing to you know, basically talk about it, see it, and ' em -- empathize it and another thing to experience

it. i'm appreciative as a defense attorney he has represented many of these people who are looking for the kinds of reform that need to happen because in many cases we know some of these folk are innocent. i know people now who are doing time for crimes that they didn't commit and i need someone who is balanced, who is fair and who understands that, not to suggest that someone else isn't that way, but i think he has an understanding that is similar to my experience that will bring a lot to the table. and it's why i've made a decision to support him and i will be supporting the motion today. i do also want to say that i appreciate a lot of what he had to say in committee. he talked about not being opposed to the police officers in our city who serve and protect our citizens

everyday, but also wanting accountability. that, to me, is fairness that is a balanced approach to what we have to deal with on the police commission. he also gave me really a lot of hope that he will be a strong commissioner. that he will challenge the department. he will challenge the poa without being an abstructionist. and i want to say that it's not that others have given me that impression. what he says comes across clear which is why i'm in strong support of mr. homasockey and i appreciate his application was turned in on time. he started his advocate early and he's been at the table and he wants

this for all the right reasons. and that is so important to me because again, the decisions that get made on this commission are so important to communities that especially i and supervisor cohen and supervisor avalos and we all represent challenges in our communities whether it's our immigration issues and all of these things, we understand that there is a diversity of decisions that need to be made in this department so people feel strongly, that the leaders of this department are truly serving and protecting everyone. and so i think that it is important to make a good decision, and this is a good decision. supporting mr. homasockey would be a good decision for this board of

supervisors and i wanted to mention that i do have a tremendous amount of respect for the other two candidates and i think two things that give me pause about mr. hing and i guess hing is your last name, i'm sorry if i'm butchering your name, was the conversation we -- first of all, actually three things. turn nothing the application late and also expressing that he will hopefully get the poa to buy in and he clarified that, and it made me concerned because i really want a fighter and someone who is going to do whatever is necessary to deal with this particular organization who has been an abinstruction as to what we have been trying to do with reforms in this department, and the other conversation around

tasers and the other expressed interest in seeing the possibility of tasers, you know, again, you know, that surprised me and i guess that would be in the context of having a larger conversation, but you know, i was a little concerned and maybe i'll say two things, maybe those kinds of conversations need to be had a little bit more in terms of discussing those particular matter and how we can address those particular issues, but today, i would like to support this motion and i'm really torn on supporting bill hing. mostly because of those particular issues. and would have liked an opportunity to really -- because we passed this out as a committee report,

time was limited and we didn't have an opportunity to really sit down and have a detailed conversation so i'm rely ongoing the information, and the presentation at rule's committee. it's a difficult decision even if this motion fails, it would be a difficult decision for me to agree without having a further conversation and so at this point, i guess what i would ask my colleagues to consider, number one, if this motion fails, we consider continuing this item and having the discussion at a later date to give members of this body an opportunity to have these conversations because one of the other issues that occurred was the video link was not up last night and didn't go up for rule's committee until this morning. this is not a decision that we should rush

into because we really need to make sure that we get it right. and i'm not suggesting that this one appointment is going to change everything on the police commission. the challenges of the department were not created overnight, and the solutions will not be overnight and i do want to appreciate supervisor cohen especially for her leadership in bringing so many of these issues to the ballot and being an advocate and being consistent and being a real force around these particular issues of reforms in our department. but we have a lot of work to do, and i want someone that i know will be a fighter, will bring creative ideas to the table, will push to make sure that these things aren't necessarily just discussed in theory, but they're implemented, and doing so in a balanced way and so i will be supporting the motion

and i want to say thank everyone for hearing me out and understanding that again, it's not about being critical or diminishing anyone's work, but if there is a need to do something different and supporting mr. homasockey would be doing something different and needed for this department. >> supervisor yee and we'll go to supervisor cohen and supervisor mar. >> thank you. this discussion has been really interesting. it reminds me why after 2 years of being a chair of the rule's committee i left it. these tough decisions, it was always -- we always had situations where we had more qualified candidates than slots and this is no different. i believe

that the three remaining candidates are qualified and they have strengths -- they have different types of strengths, but i'm -- i will not be supporting the motion because i believe professor hing is really the type of person i want to be on the commission. i've seen him as a fighter throughout his decades of services to the community and i've seen his connection with the community. most of the times, afar because the issues he dealt with not issues that i dealt with, but just being working in the community for all my life, basically. i've seen him as a conrad to not only to the asian-american community, but i've seen him reach across the aisle to a lot of other communities so this is

what i have seen and in interviewing or talking to all three of the candidates that has been mentioned, i still believe that even though they have all different types of strengths, to me, bill - professor hing brings his experience of basically about three or 4 decades that he brings in that nobody else can match at this point. >> thank you supervisor yee. supervisor mar. >> i'll say that i totally support what my colleague yee just said. bill hing has been a fighter for over 40 years and he's in the trenches. he puts theory into practice and retest his theories. he's been parts of multi racial coalitions and respectful of communities and again, over 40 years of experience from san francisco neighborhood legal assistance

foundation to east palo alto to work with the san francisco foundation on racial justice and equity, but he's got deep relationships with communities and leaders and we need that at this time and i urge support for him. resist the stereotype of law professors please ask acknowledge as supervisor tang mentioned that professor hing really is a strong candidate that will serve us well on the police commission. thank you. >> if we buy into the stereotypes, obama wouldn't be president at this time, supervisor mar. supervisor kim. >> thank you, president breed. i just want to appreciate how difficult this decision is before us today and thank you for reminding me, supervisor yee why i don't want to go back on rule's committee either. i just you know, it was difficult for me to make an assessment being i wasn't able to watch the rule's committee yesterday.

i did see ms. julie sue present on thursday online and i just want to thank you for your presentation. i thought you did a great job on in particular talking why this seat is so important for the chinese and asian american community and in particular, that has long felt been ignored by sfpd. a lot of crime that takes place in these communities are often as victims and so our often responded by seeing we're going to start reconvening in apr council monthly for the community to be able to have consistent dialogue with the police department around what is priority needs are around public safety. and i hope the board doesn't mind, but being that we have the privilege of having the candidates here in the room today, and just looking around the room and seeing where the votes are head, i wanted to ask professor

bill to come up to answer a few questions if that's okay. just reading on paper, my leaning is towards is -- >> colleagues can we do that without objection? without objection, we'll allow members of the board to be asked questions. >> thank you. my leaning is towards professor hing because i'm the most particular with his experience around immigrant rights issues in the community, and i think they are so relevant to the police commission today. but just a couple of questions. one of the points that had been brought up about you and this is an important thing and i asked this a lot when i chaired rule's committee is whether you have attended the meeting which you're applying for, because that's an interest of passion around the issues so i wanted to give professor hing an opportunity to respond to that, to answer why he may not have

attended police commissions and why we should support -- >> let me thank you for considering my candidacy and listen to go -- listening to the conversation that's taken place, if i'm fortunate enough to get through this successfully, i want you to know that i pledge to meet with each and every one of you to talk about your desires and your goals and your aspiration and to get to know you better and to try to help move the agenda forward in a positive way for san francisco. i plead guilty. i haven't attended any of the meetings. and partly the reason for it is that i wasn't thinking about that seriously about the particular commission. i've been thinking about these issues in trying to figure out a way of how to get more involved on a day to day basis on these issues that are

challenging to the nation. and as i indicated in rule's committee, i was relies on mg understanding when victor wong was you elected to the superior court he was going to be sworn in, in january and that's when the opening would be and that's when i would apply. >> professor, i'm not asking about the tardiness of your application. given you have not attended previous police commission hearings why should we as the board of supervisors support you today? >> you should support me because i have a long history of the commitment to taking on difficult jobs, rolling up my sleeves and working 110% on each assignment that i've had. i pledge to you that if i am selected to be a member of this

commission that i will not only just fulfill the duties, but i will go far beyond what you might imagine in terms of putting into practice the years of understanding that i have on how to work with individuals, how to work with folks quote on quote from across the aisle. i've done that on a criminal -- the commission on the administration of justice and i've done it with board patrol agents. i've done it with other faculty member and it's something that i thrive on. i think i'm good at. i was asked a question yesterday that i -- about how i would -- how i would bring together the diverse community and i want you to know, my style is more a style on trying to meet with

individuals first. and trying to get to know them and know their goals and values are. i don't think i'm a grandstander. that's a different type of philosophy or approach that others may be successful at. i'm more of a let's sit down and chat about your goal and priorities and let's see where we can agree, see where we might not agree, so i guess i'm -- i'm digressing but i suppose i'm asking you to base your judgment based on my history of hard work and commitment on taking on difficult challenge and fulfilling those challenges. >> and by the way, your record is so clear and i have known about you since my under graduate days of stanford when we were fighting for your 10-year at stanford. i appreciate all you have done. given all your accomplishments and the demand for your

service, i guess my next question is do you have time for this? >> i sure do. i've been told by a couple of former members of the commission how much work it is and i've been told the version where you can do the minimalist version but you can do the meaningful version and that's what i choose to do. i pledge to you that i will devote a massive amount of time on this because i want what i believe you want. i want there to be change so that the types of incidents that we've seen are minimized or eliminated for heaven's sake if we can, and that's what i'm pledge to go do and i know how much work it's going to take and i'm ready to work at that time and roll up my sleeve and get under the hood and do the work. >> my final question. if there was a concrete or specific issue area you could work on as commissioner knowing you cannot tackle everything, what would

that be? >> well, it would be deescalation train and i talked about it a little bit yesterday. i think that there's -- the crisis intervention training is perhaps the most potentially meaningful approach. and i'm not sure if supervisor breed -- i don't think that i endorse tasers. what i questioned, i thought i questioned the viewing tasers as a pen in a sierra. you're right. we need to have a longer conversation. >> you specifically say in the case of a knife willeding individual, it's appropriate to use tasers. >> if a department used tasers, that's the only time we'll use it. but i'm not authorizing a department should authority tasers. i'm sorry if i made that unclear to you. i was

talking the context if tasers were adopted because that was one of the recommendations in a cop's report. >> as a commissioner you would have the ability to make the decision, what decision would you make based on what the recommendations have been? >> i think that particular one would be unwise. >> so just -- let me rephrase it. are you supportive of tasers or opposed to tasers? >> i'm opposed to them. >> can you clarify for me injure statement that implies it would be appropriate to use it in that particular case. >> that if tasers are for some reason adopted by any police department, they should be limited and i said this. it should be limited. speaker: you're saying you're not one of the commissioners to support adopting that? >> that's right. >> i want -- thank you for that clarify.

>> i'm speaking hypothetically if it were adopted but i'm not supportive of them. >> supervisor kim, i apologize. i wanted to get clarify. >> that was my last question. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> supervisor cohen. >> we're going to call the other candidates up as well. >> i just -- i was looking around the room and i was seeing where we were headed with the votes and because of that, it looked like professor hing is likely to be approved as our police commissioner. i didn't have the opportunity to him him speak so i wanted to ask the questions before we moved forward. i feel we have three strong candidates and you know, my leaning towards professor hing is because i'm most intimate around your body of work. if i was to support

the original report out of the rule's committee, my main concern is around your time commitment and your particular and interest in the police commission verses a whole variety of other work that we all deeply care about. and so i wanted to hear him speak on those comments today -- on those questions and concerns. >> thank you supervisor. >> supervisor cohen. >> there's a couple of things i wanted to talk about. you mentioned terms and i wanted to share some commission. the commission is made up of seven seat and three are appointed by the board of supervisors through the rule's process and appointed by the mayor. the next seat that will be available and i'm not advocating -- this is a point of information is jesus, his suit will expire april 30th,

2017, and then the next seat to -- for expiration is dr. joe marshal which is a mayor nominee and he'll expire on april 30, 2018, -- 2017. dr. marshal, 2008 and also sonyia so there's two mayor appointees -- i agree that the candidate was phenomenal and thoughtful. it sounds like the way the conversation is going, because people are more familiar and knowledgeable and have more comfort ability they would rather be with someone that they're more familiar with. i - i think for me it's about

clear distinction between abacademic verses a practitioner. 40 years is a phenomenal amount of times but i have been doing this for 6 years and i haven't seen that connection. and i am still uncomfortable with supporting someone that hasn't taken the time to attend a meeting. they've spent time being involved verses rolling their sleeves and getting involved. thank you. >> thank you supervisor cohen. supervisor cohen. -- campos. >> i'm not going -- we should move forward and vote. i think there are differences of opinion on which happened today, but i think we should vote and i think that we should act today. i actually think the mistakes the mayor made with respect to the police department is how slow they have been to move things forward including this election

of a chief. i don't think a board should make that mistake and whatever way you know, it comes down, let's take action. i think we have you know, greatly qualified people and i don't think we're going to go wrong either way. thank you. >> thank you supervisor campos. no other name oz the roster. madam clerk on the motion, call the roll. >> on the motion to strike bill hing and amend with john, supervisor tang. >> no. speaker: supervisor yee. >> no. >> supervisor avalos. >> aye. >> supervise he breed. >> aye. >> campos. >> no. >> supervisor cohen. >> aye. >> supervisor farrell. speaker: no. >> supervisor kim. speaker: no. >> supervisor mar. and no. >> supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> there are four eyes and seven nos with supervisor's -- and six nos with supervisor's tang, yee, campos, farrell, kim and mar in the descent.

>> the motion fails. supervisor mar. >> i like to make the motion we appoint professor hing to the police commission, term ended april 30, 2018. >> there's no need to make a motion since it's already on the agenda. >> but it felt good to say. >> let me just, you know, say seeing no other names on the roster, you know, i'm just not there yet. i, again, am -- i really appreciate the comments of supervisor campos. i'm not necessarily opposed, but i'm not at a place at this time with the information i have to feel comfortable enough to support this decision and you know, i look forward to the opportunity to get to know professor hing and to understand him a lot more, but i just don't feel comfortable. this is a reaim